Why not Take Advantage?

Kyle Phelps

Knowing that Longwood University only has a 42% graduation rate still will not force people to find a solution to improve this number.  People will always resist or resent the fact that if someone comes up with a solution they will not take the opportunity to use it.  That is why I am well aware of the fact that the solution that I have come up with that many people will resist or resent it from the start.  I have thought of a few people and groups that will not like my idea of having a program on the weekend and having a class if they do so choose to take to help them graduate on time and get into the real world quicker to where they can start there next chapter in life.

Groups that would resent or resist my idea of having each student to have the same level of preparedness there must be a mandatory four day even just like New Lancer Days for the transfer students to attend.  This would help out the transfer students in a big way and that leads to improving their academic and social skills which in the long run leads to a better four year graduation rate for Longwood University.  New transfer students should have to be attending a mandatory weekend event on their first weekend on campus so they can get acquainted with Longwood University.  In addition, if they feel like they need to take a class like LSEM they can if they want too.  There may be some resistance to this idea because some people may feel they already been in college and transferred here and should feel ready right when they get here but that is not always the case.

Students may resist this idea because they are sometimes lazy and do not want to have to go to a program on the weekend and have to sign up for an extra class.  They may not want to spend their weekend going to a program but instead would rather hang out with friends.  Also the parents may not like this idea of having to spend more money on an extra class for their child.  In addition, the faculty may resist this solution because they may feel as if the transfer students has already been going to a college school for the past two years and should already know how college life is by now.  Also the faculty may not want to come in on the weekend for a few hours when they have already been working all week. 

Hopefully people will take the opportunity and take the time to set aside a few hours of their weekend to help better their future and get into the real world sooner rather than later.

Longwood paving the path to the future

Longwood can address the problem of inequality between off campus fraternities and on campus fraternities. By trying to reform these organizations. I used the word reforming, because if they were on-campus organizations, they could be regulated and mandated to follow certain restrictions, to avoid ever being off campus again. The first suggestion I have is analyze the Fraternities and Sororities in question. Make a set of requirements that they have to achieve in order for them to be accepted to be on-campus.Find out the history of the events that put them in that situation. Find out if the people that put the organization in jeopardy, are still active with the organization and finally talk to them, and ask them if they are interested in being back on campus. If they say they are then go back to the history, events and members and classify them. Classify them in one of five categories: Low risk, med-low risk, med-risk, med-high risk and high risk. Then define each one of them, my suggested definitions are as follow. The organization has strong leaders, and members are active on campus while maintaining a decent GPA (decent GPA can be defined later but for me it’s 2.33) and do community service and have risk management procedures, Also reason for being off campus is close to non existent. Medium low risk, organization lacks strong leadership, but members are active on campus and contribute to the community and reason for being off campus is close to non existent. Medium risk, GPA is good, lacks leadership, and don’t do much for the community but has risk management procedures, history of why they are off campus, has to have to extra repercussions. Medium high GPA is low, and don’t do much for the community, cops get called occasionally because of them, and reason that they were kicked off is fairly recent, and have not dealt with the members correctly. High risk, GPA is low, members don’t do anything for the community, cops get called a decent amount of times and members are known to cause alterations, and issue still occur. Depending on which category they fall in, procedures should be put in place for them to be allowed to be on campus, this is only effective if they want to be an on campus organization. Low risk organizations, should be allowed in as long as they follow standard procedures like the other on campus organizations. This means having insurance for the fraternity, paying the dues to the school etc. On top of that they should have a semester probation period. Low-medium the same should be done as the above but add community service hours to be expected to meet. Medium organizations should have a semester probation period off campus, this would entail no cops called on them, not having members causing problems but more especially dealing with those members in an appropriate fashion. The probation period off-campus would help to prove their dedication to become on campus, after that they should be treated as a low-med risk organization. Medium high almost the same just a year probation with the addition of community service and GPA requirements during that year, this is a lot of work. I think it should be sufficient work that the organization would not ever risk being off campus again. High risk should be dealt with on absolutely individual bases, if an organization is high risk they should probably not be allowed to be back in. The idea of having these organizations on campus is to reduce harms to themselves and other, and produce citizen leaders. If they are high risk it means that there’s little to none chance of that, that is why I think it should be dealt on individual basis, reconsider all the members, their actions while enrolled and reconsider if the are medium high risk. If after this they are still High risk they should not be allowed in and not allowed to be considered to bring back on until all current members have graduated. Also probation for med to mid-high should restrict some of the rights, like requesting money from SGA but not from holding positions. If this plan of action is enacted, the future of it would be an application process for future off-campus, organizations. Hopefully this application process would discourage organizations to ever being off campus. By enacting this Longwood would have strict guidelines on how to deal with organizations. Organizations would be aware and I think would deter them from wrong actions, even if they are off-campus and want to be back on. Also I think Longwood should encourage and help low-risk organizations succeed. They could be an extension of Longwood’s citizen leader ideal, and that’s something Longwood can be proud of.

Should all off-campus Fraternities/Sororities be treated the same (#6 redefining)

As I have been writing these blogs, I realized that there is way too many issues. As a result I have missed the main point. There’s three situations that these off-campus Fraternities and Sororities fall in. First situation and probably the most problematic, DTX or “Delta” has been kicked off from campus, and has remained that way since a long time ago. Seemingly like they want to come back, if they don’t want to be back on campus, because they don’t want to obey certain regulations that everyone obeys by. Then maybe they have to be dealt in another way, and not necessarily  by trying to bring them on-campus. The second situation entails the Fraternities and sororities that have been kicked off recently. Which are AXP, TKE and ZXA, the most recent one being ZXA who was recolonized and old members weren’t allowed back and became ZXA. What do we know about these organizations? They have broken the rules, the rules that everyone is “supposed” to follow, I put that in quotes because it is evident that even on-campus Fraternities and Sororities break the rules at one point or another. Sometimes making it seem more like a game of who can hide it better. Also we know that not all the brothers and sisters were responsible for the organizations being kicked off. Which is why I believe that they should have a chance to present their case, and given the opportunity to come back as an on campus organization. Finally the final situation is the one that Gamma Psi and ABY are involved in, and the least problematic according to Wolfgang Amadeus director of Fraternity and Sorority life. These two are local organizations, although Gamma Psi has been in other schools it has never been nationally recognized, and ABY was founded here. Gamma Psi has had issues with the school in the past, when it came down to trying to get on campus. Those issues were because of members that have been graduated for a long time. ABY has just never been on-campus. With that being said the big picture issue comes down to this, there’s not a system in place to deal with these situations. There’s no clear cut answer of what a fraternity can do to address these students, and yet these students miss out on opportunities. I have preached about how they can’t join SGA or Honor Board. I have recently found out about another restriction, on-campus fraternities and recognized organizations can go in front of the SGA and request money for programs such as putting on speakers, doing community events and such. I can see why this could of been fair in the past, when off campus organizations truly did not want to be on campus. Times have changed and Longwood should change as well, we are dealing with students who will probably only be here for four years. Most of them are 18 to 22 years old. We are not dealing with hooligans, it’s not unreasonable to ask for a method to clean your name or in these case your organization’s name. Our society has courts, and penalties for breaking rules. These penalties and consequences are given to make the accused become a better person. I truly the same can be done with some of this groups. And why not everyone deserves a second chance, forget and forgive right? Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery and today is a gift, that is why it’s called the present. Longwood should make the most out of this present, and pave the road for a more beneficial future for students.

Just for clarification

DTX – AKA Delta, Delta Tau Chi

TKE – Tau Kappa Epsilon

AXP – Alpha Chi Rho

ZTX- Zeta Chi Alpha

ABY – Alpha Beta Psi




Blog #8: Resistance Training- Anticipating a Push from Opposing Arguments

Two groups will surely have their issues with my proposal to extend the Longwood Fitness Center’s hours:


1. Staff

2. The center’s directors


Staff, understandably, has reason to be less than thrilled about the later shifts. These longer shifts will…well, be longer! And some student staff members have more important things to do. But, there is good news! First, and I feel most importantly, the extension is only a trial run, for only 4 nights, and only a total of 8 extra hours! Plus, whoever signs up for these later shifts will get paid a little extra. Not too shabby! And presumably, staff workers working at the gym enjoy the atmosphere and should appreciate the benefits of physical and mental wellness, so a 2 hour a night sacrifice for the sake of possibly bettering the students’ all around health should appear a good cause.

If the extension trial does not succeed, it’s back to the normal way of doing things.

Those in charge of the center will most likely find rescheduling a headache. When I spoke with Gus Hemmer, the associate director of campus recreation, that was his main concern. But, even so, the concern appears minuscule. He said that the budget they work with in relation to staffing would be the hassle, and also the simple fact that the schedule would need re-arranging. However, like I said in the last post, the additional cost for two late night shift works would only amount to $130 for a whole week’s work. What I am proposing in my trial run is only a 4 day plan, so the cost of employment would be even cheaper! Simply put, if the trial flops then the most they lose is less than $130 dollars. If the venture seems worth it, then financial plans and problems would be addressed later.


The two main points of resistance here are money and time. Certain groups are going to be concerned with investing money, and others will be concerned with how the demands of extra time will infringe on their personal lives. But really, the possible outcomes are so much more beneficial than the costs- both in time and money.

For one, as I explained earlier, the only real cost would be the $130 dollar increase (not even). That is really pocket change considering the whole of the university. The whole point of the trial run is to see if the plan is even worth a permanent extension or maybe even a permanent weekly extension, so my proposal cuts down hours. The proposal will work with only 4 days, that is only 8 extra hours. I’m asking the department to spend less than $130 dollars to test run my plan for less than a week.

Some people in general may try to question other financial issues regarding the facility, but I can disprove those quite easily. From the very start, I anticipated opponents bringing up the obvious fact that running the facility longer would cost more in electrical and water. This is false. The building is LEED certified, and for those of you that are just jumping into my blog…LEED is a green organization that aims at constructing energy and water efficient buildings. Upon bringing up and questioning this point and issue with Mr. Hemmer, he easily admitted that yes, the building will really have no issue regarding energy of any sort- it’s taken care of.

Also, my proposal suggests a 2 hour extension. So, instead of closing at 10, it would close at 12 and this would mean electricity would be on longer. Mr. Hemmer also explained to me that this too would be little to no problem because the facility’s lights already stay on until about 12am.

Staffing is another issue. I have heard many ask, well people are not going to want to work that late. Maybe not, but of the 40 + applicants that Mr. Hemmer receives for the job every application period, it is more than possible to obtain at least 2 people willing to work 2 hours later for some extra cash. Mr. Hemmer mentioned that this “refusal to work”  argument can also be applied to the early morning shifts. The gym opens at 6:30am. That is pretty early for many students on campus, yet you can be sure that every morning the gym has the minimum 2 staff members in it, and this has been going on for years. If there are available workers for early morning, surely some will be willing to work a little later at night. Early birds and night owls exist.

Another new argument I have stumbled upon is this: Exercising late is bad for you. The fitness center promotes wellness. If they promote wellness, they cannot support late night work outs.

Fair enough.

But, here’s the thing. No matter what is “good” or “bad” for someone, people are going to inevitably do what makes them feel good. You cannot just close down a McDonald’s after 6 because it is bad for health to eat later at night, can you? It may be a weak example because McDonald’s is the adversary of any health conscious person…but you see my point, hopefully. People like what they like, and if something satiates a craving then most will find a way to satiate. Moreover, Mr. Hemmer and I discussed this argument and we both agreed that the statement is faulty. Really, this type of rebuttal depends on an individual’s sleeping patterns. Working out or working late may be bad for your health only if you are not getting enough sleep. If someone works the late night shift and does not have class until 12pm or 1pm or later, their health will not likely be negatively affected. Same for exercisers. People have the capacity to determine what works for them, regardless of what some study may show. I work out late occasionally, sometimes all I do is work out late— and I am healthy and happy. I fit it into my schedule and make sure that I am getting enough sleep. So yes, late night work (of any sort) can be bad, but it is not bad just because it is late night work…it is bad because of people’s faulty scheduling.


The benefits for those who may resist are these:

For staff: More money and promoting a healthy habit that they most likely partake in themselves and wish others to partake in; giving others the ability to further improve physical and mental health while they study on campus and become happier, healthier, and more confident as a consequence.

For management: The chance to explore and option never explored before, and possibly advance it successfully adding to the academic success and outstanding reputation that Longwood holds. Also like staff, this opportunity should provide a chance for management to help out their student community, and will give them something more to feel good about.


Proposing a full blown permanent extension would be ridiculous. Suggesting a 7-day extension would be expensive and risky. A 4-day trial run of the extension would be perfect because it could gauge success with minimal cost to everyone.


Local & Institutional Resistance

Blog 8
By: Alison Tyler

My two solutions:

1. To make the schools a more secure place, meaning more security officers in schools, more security cameras, and more patrols outside of schools.

2. To have the community work together in reducing crime levels, meaning coming forward and giving a testimony if a crime was witnessed and helping in anyway to solve crimes.

These solutions may sound good on paper but in reality it would take a lot of money, time, and effort to commit to these solutions. Making schools a more secure place will include money and effort from the schools and the police departments. Having the community work together in reducing crime levels will include everyone working and living in the community.

However these groups may or probably will resent or resist my solution. Those who resist my first solution may feel that it involves too much money. Installing more security in schools is definitely expensive but in long run it could save lives. I know parents would feel a lot better sending their children to a secure school and not having to worry about what might happen. I know a secure school will allow to teachers and other staff to feel better as well. A happy staff can influence children’s education in so many ways. Those who resist my second solution may feel that it is dangerous and too time consuming. It is certainly time consuming and I can be dangerous but with the proper precautions the community can catch the bad guys. If they know everyone is keeping an eye open looking for trouble they may be more resistant in committing a crime. A secure community can create a happy community.

Each group has a strong influence over these solutions. In order to implement them it will take money, time, and effort. But aside from costs of these solutions wouldn’t everyone benefit in the long run? I believe so. I believe that a secure school will create higher education and secure community will create happier residents and workers.

Don’t Push Me ‘Cause I’m Close to the Edge

Resistance against new programs is very common, because it is just natural for people not to like new things. It happens and there is no real way to change that. But it is possible to make the change easier and when it is easier, people are going to go along with the change without too much hesitation. New Lancer Days has to change slightly every year to accommodate the growing number of students that attend New Lancer Days every year.

Resistance is expected with every new program that is put into affect, and I expect resistance for the Basic Medical Awareness seminar. I believe the most resistance is going to come from the students who do not want to attend yet another seminar during their first weekend at college. This is why it is important to do this seminar during New Lancer Days because there is going to be a massive number of students who won’t attend a weekend or after-class seminar. While this seminar will be more exciting than sitting through the reading of the Student Handbook, it will not be a rage party by any means. New freshman want to explore everything that Farmville has to offer, and that is going to cause their attention span to be virtually non-existent. The important thing is to keep the seminar short, sweet, and to the point so student’s minds don’t wander.

Other than student resistance, I do not expect other kinds of resistance to occur. There might be some institutional resistance in the beginning because it will require the schedule to change for New Lancer Days, but the purpose of the seminar is to educate students and begin the process of creating citizen leaders. With the end goal being so positive for both students and the University as a whole, there shouldn’t be too much resistance from Longwood.

Longwood University prides itself in making students Citizen Leaders

Over all, this proposal is meant to better the lives of those students who chose to come to Longwood. This is not supposed to make every Longwood students an EMT or a paramedic. This seminar is supposed to teach students how to react in an emergency situation. Swift and calm reactions to a variety of medical emergencies is going to make the difference in the health of a patient. The important of proper reaction to an emergency can prove lifesaving for some emergencies. By knowing how to react, and the proper way to treat medical emergencies, Longwood University is going to become a safer place for everyone who comes to campus.

Looking for the Haters (#8)

The creation of a direct campus line to Longwood Village seems like the perfect solution to student’s justified complaints. Village residents will greatly benefit from the proposed, new route because it will be less crowded and cut pickup and drop-off times in half. The current schedule is 35 minutes in between each bus to go the route around campus, Lancer Park, campus again, and then back to the Village. While 35 minutes does not seem very long, it is difficult to manage around Longwood’s class times. The new bus will greatly benefit the students living in Longwood Village because it will allow students to get to campus efficiently.  Unfortunately, as with any solution, this will likely meet resistance from several different groups.














3:00-3:50  : (Last class on Fridays)










(Courtesy of Longwood University; This is an image of the FAB’s campus line schedule and a general list of Longwood’s class times for comparison. Upon comparison, the FAB schedule is inconsistent with class schedules that make getting to class on time difficult).

Many Lancer Park residents could resent this new campus line. In my proposal, I will likely plan to take away one of the buses to Lancer Park to give to the Village. Currently, Lancer Park has 3.5 buses to their disposal, while the Village only has the shared bus. Ideally, I would give the shared bus to the new campus line, leaving Lancer Park with three buses. The current system only has direct lines to Lancer Park until 1:45, and with the elimination of the shared line, at least one direct line to Lancer Park would have to be extended to midnight. I think there could be some resistance initially from Park residents that do not understand the benefits the Park is receiving indirectly. By taking away the shared bus, Park residents would also no longer have to deal with the overcrowding after 1:45 and these residents would also have consistently short intervals between buses because they too would only have a direct line all day.

Additionally, there may be a small resistance by Longwood Village and Lancer Park residents because there would be no shared bus. In the current system, Lancer Park residents could take a FAB all the way to Longwood Village, and vise versa. This allows students to visit friends easily and without using cars. In my dimensions of my proposal, I cannot properly address their concerns because I am proposing the elimination of that shared line. However, I would argue that the benefits of short intervals between buses, consistent times, and spaciousness outweigh this resistance. Moreover, students wishing to visit the different apartment communities would still have access. These students would take their direct line to campus and then take the direct line from campus to the applicable community.

The main concern is institutional resistance to the costs of a direct line to Longwood Village. I can likely see resistance mainly from the Budget Office and the university’s president. These two parties have a stronghold of control of what and how Longwood University spends their money. The cost to maintain two direct lines to each apartment community is relatively inexpensive in the bigger picture of running a university (each bus costs about 165,000 annually for gas and maintenance). Longwood University has this amount tenfold in their annual budget but the big resistance will come from convincing the Budget Office and President Reveley of how this is essential to the student body. These groups will likely resist because the university is currently undergoing a major construction project entitled, Vision 2020, and their attention and money is concentrated there. This is why it will be essential to prove how the university’s plans cannot go on without improving the FAB system. The plan calls for eliminating parking and additions to the aforementioned apartment communities and their goal will crash and burn without giving student’s a way to and from campus. If these parties are convinced of the need for a direct line to Longwood Village, in relation to their undergoing construction plans, then they will be more likely to appropriate the funds for improving the FAB.

The final resistance I anticipate is from the Farmville Area Bus management. I think their resistance comes from a reputation basis. The management and the university just redid the FAB’s campus route. Due to the new additions at Lancer Park, the FAB management and the university came up with the current “solution” of three direct lines to the Park and one shared bus between the Park and the Village. The additions to Lancer Park were just completed the summer of 2013 and with the time constraints, the FAB management made a solid effort to give students a workable transportation system. Their effort will not go unappreciated because its ridership almost doubled in a matter of months. This unprecedented change would have been hard to come up with a solution for, but the current solution the FAB management came up with should be considered more of a trial run. It is now clear what quirks occurred with their plan and how to solve them. In my proposal, I will attempt to take an appropriate tone to limit blame for the FAB management. Their plan was a good start, but my proposal will eliminate the kinks. They certainly earned some credit for giving my proposal a structural basis to work with.

Defining the Solution- Blog 7

My problem is that Longwood does not currently allow the bonus dollars for meal plans to roll over every semester.  Right now, they only allow the bonus dollars to be rolled over from fall to spring but after that they are lost.  I think that Longwood could have a much better policy to allow students to get their money back from bonus dollars.  There are multiple solutions that could possibly solve this problem but I think that the best way is to allow them to roll over every semester while students are still enrolled at Longwood.  Since we have already paid for it, administration could just let us keep the unspent dollars on our plan and if we still have not used them all when we leave, then the school can make a check out to the individual student for the remaining amount left for their bonus dollars.  The first step to make this proposal a reality would be to contact the food service director with my ideas and see what he has to say about it.  My next step would be to bring the idea to the board at Longwood University, whoever makes decisions for the school to make this change.  Also, Aramark would have to be involved in this process in order for Longwood to change the policy since they are the ones who cater to Longwood.  The most resistance I would have against my proposal would definitely be the school.  Right now, the school is getting to keep the extra bonus dollars if they aren’t spent.  So since they would have to give us our money back and have more of a hassle by making a check out to each student, naturally they are going to give me the most problem.



A Possible Solution to the James

Last week I defined the main problem with my social issue as the idea that Dominion Virginia Power wants to succeed in building power lines over the James River in a direct tourist spot, located essentially in Jamestown settlement. They are fighting adamantly on getting the permit to start building soon, and are only waiting for the State Corporation Commission (or SCC) to approve of it.

I am clearly against Dominion in the destination they have chosen to build the lines, but not the idea of building them itself. I know that the Virginia peninsula needs the new power upgrade due to the Yorktown station closing in 2015, and that without the new transmission line Dominion will not be up to governmental standards approaching summer 2015. The idea that they have chosen to mar the beauty of arguably Virginia’s most significant historical site without a second thought give me the impression that they don’t necessarily give a hoot what they mess up when they build, as long as it’s not at a disadvantage to them.

I feel that the SCC should choose to allow Dominion to build on the alternative route offered during the court trial. It’s a route that is significantly longer in length, and costs more, but it does not cut across the James nor is it really intruding though the historical portion of Virginia. Part of the route is attached to existing transmission towers, and cuts through to the Chickahominy switching station. This would be my primary solution regarding this issue, because it is currently the only alternative to the lines being built over the historical river.

In order to implement this solution, first, the SCC would have to vote in favor of it. Currently, there is a letter with new information submitted by the United States Department of the Interior causing a ruckus; Dominion does not want it to be considered in the final decision, whereas James City County, the primary group in opposition, is all for it. If the community could come together and help enforce that the new information should be used in consideration for the final decision, it may alter the potential choice that the council will agree upon.
If this were to be successful, Dominion would most likely attempt to appeal the decision, and other stakeholders would pop up depending on how the council framed the verdict. It would have potential viable points against the decision, such as the price or the effects of the new location. My argument is mostly value-based; I really just don’t want my historical sites to be ruined by industrialization and the presence of power lines crossing the most important river on the East Coast.


Works Cited:

“Document List For Case Number : PUE-2012-00029.”SCC Docket Search. State Corporation Commission, 25 Oct.

2013. Web. 1 Nov 2013. <http://docket.scc.state.va.us/CyberDocs/Libraries/Default_Library/Common/frameviewdsp.asp?doc=133193&lib=CASEWEBP_LIB&mimetype=application/pdf&rendition=native>.

The Beginning Steps Towards Change

Blog Post #7

Depression awareness and suicide prevention programs are not required in Virginia public high schools. This is problematic because these programs give students information on depression and suicide and how to help others who are depressed. Awareness and prevention programs have also been shown to help decrease suicidal tendencies in high school students (King, Strunk, and Sorter). High school is the age at which many students are first exposed to depression and suicide in their personal lives, so participating in a depression awareness and suicide prevention program could greatly benefit them at this point in their life.

As someone who had a depressed friend in high school and struggled with how to help them, I believe a depression awareness and suicide prevention program would be really helpful to high school students. When I was in high school I continually tried to help my friend but nothing I said ever really seemed to help much. It would have been really beneficial to me and I’m sure to other students as well (there were five suicides in my high school in the time I was there) to have gone through a depression awareness and suicide prevention program in high school. Implementing awareness and prevention programs in public high schools in Virginia will help to prevent tragedies, like those that occurred in my high school, from happening in the future.

The first step towards implementing a depression awareness and suicide prevention program would be to figure out what information it should contain. The goal of the program is to help high school students understand depression better and be able to get help for someone else or themselves should they need it. So, ideally this program would continue to teach the definition of depression and its symptoms, but would go more in depth to explain how a depressed person feels. Getting high school students who have never been depressed to understand how a depressed person feels will be one of the hardest parts of teaching an awareness and prevention program because it is hard for people to empathize with a feeling they have never experienced. This program should also teach students effective ways to communicate with someone who is depressed that will be productive and actually help the person suffering from depression. Finally, the program should help students to be confident when going to an adult for help. This includes teaching them how to recognize suicidal symptoms in a friend and making them realize that it is better to go to an adult for help and have a friend be angry rather than lose that friend for good.

The second step would be to determine how to implement this program in schools. The program could be included in health classes or it could be introduced as a new required class. There are pros and cons to both options. The pros for implementing the program through health classes are that health class is already required for all high school students so it wouldn’t add another class for students to try and fit in before graduation. The cons are that since health teachers aren’t specifically trained in this area they might continue to gloss over it like they already do, or they may not be effective at teaching it so students will not benefit from it. The pros for implementing the program as a new class are that the people teaching it would be specialized to teach the information and so it would probably benefit the students more than the previous option. The cons are that students already have so many classes to take before graduation they might have trouble fitting it into their schedule. The most realistic way to implement the program is probably through health classes.

The third step to implementing this program would be to determine what the extra cost would be to design the program and for materials needed to implement it. The two main costs would be to pay whoever designs the program and to pay for textbooks that include the information for the program. These costs shouldn’t be too extreme but might cause some resistance.

These three steps are the basis the implementation of a depression awareness and suicide prevention program in Virginia high schools that would really benefit students and potentially reduce the number of suicides in high schools.

Works Cited

King, Keith, A., Catherine, M. Strunk, and Michael, T. Sorter. “Preliminary         Effectiveness             Of Surviving The Teens Suicide Prevention And Depression         Awareness Program             On Adolescents’ Suicidality And Self-Efficacy In   Performing Help-Seeking Behaviors.” Journal Of School Health 81.9 (2011): 581-590. CINHL Plus with Full Text. Web. 27 Sept. 2013.